Mercurial vs. Bazaar speedtest clone and log - update: hg 1.1 vs. bzr 1.10

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

I just updated my bzr vs. hg speedtest for clone and log, this time for bzr 
1.10 and hg 1.1: 

- http://draketo.de/english/free-software/light/mercurial-vs-bazaar-
speedtest-2-hg-1-1-vs-bzr-1-10

This time it comes with a simple test script, so  you can simply repeat the 
tests for yourself. 

I wrote that test script (test.sh) in shell, because the test actually simply 
consists of calling time, bzr and hg, along with some rm and cp :) 

The results: 

* First test: Initial cloning from the web. 
With repositories containing the same changesets (roughly, since bzr tracks 
dir name changes and hg doesn't) Mercurial is more than 6 times as fast as 
Bazaar. But there might be a better way to serve bzr repositories, so this 
isn't perfectly decisive. But since local cloning in Mercurial is 6.7 times 
faster, the reason for the higher speed is likely to be in the client. 

* Second test: Repository size
A Mercurial repository needs about half the space of a Bazaar repository, even 
though they contain roughly the same data. (111M instead of 214M)

* Third test: A full log. 
Here Mercurial is about 2.2 times as fast as Bazaar: 13s instead of 30s. 

* Fourth test: Local clones
Local cloning in Mercurial is about 6.7 times faster than in Bazaar: about 38s 
instead of 4min 14s. 


Best wishes, 
Arne
-- 
-- My stuff: http://draketo.de - stories, songs, poems, programs and stuff :)
-- Infinite Hands: http://infinite-hands.draketo.de - singing a part of the 
history of free software.
-- Ein Würfel System: http://1w6.org - einfach saubere (Rollenspiel-) Regeln.

-- PGP/GnuPG: http://draketo.de/inhalt/ich/pubkey.txt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20081213/4d40751d/attachment.pgp